Home Forums Hunting & Shooting AR and Tactical Rifles Lightweight rings for AR

I picked up a DPMS Sportical And a Colt 6920 a few days ago and as I am wanting to put together a Lightweight hunting rifle what are the lightest rings I need to get ?
I also hear that AR rings need to be higher?
Craig

For an AR, I would recommend a 1 piece cantilever scope mount, aluminum will be the lightest. The Burris PEPR is a good example. Usually high to extra high is proper size.

You need a cantilever set-up to be able to access the charging handle easily. Rock River and Leupold also make good mounts.

So I cant just use a set of regular rings ?
Theres no way to access the charging handle with a scope mounted without a cantilever set up ?
Craig

You can use a regular set of rings . It makes the charging handle a pain to access, but you can get either a new handle or an extension for the existing handle. I have two set-up[s, both with standard rings. Will have to get an extension soon.

I was sorta thinking Leupold Rifleman medium or high rings for lightweight and I have used them on 7mm mags so I dont think the 223 would be a problem.
Craig

I am not sure how a cantilever mount makes accessing the charging handle easier. The hard part is getting your fingers under the scope eyepiece.

If you get Durasight see through rings, they are the perfect height.

Generally, to mount a scope directly to an AR's M1913 rail without some kind of riser-type base, you (again, generally) need a minimum of "high" rings. Usually, ring companies make AR rings in "Extra High" configurations. This ensures the scope is mounted at a height consistent with the average shooter's cheek weld. There's no drop to an AR stock, so you have to get the scope up high. This is beneficial, as it clears the scope from interfering with the charging handle. Though, I've never had that problem.

I favor:

http://badgerordnance.com/30mm-scope-rings/

The AR-15 extra high rings in alloy are reasonably light and as sturdy as you'll find. If you run a 1" scope, you'll have to get reducers, which I've had no problems running. Badger stuff is relatively expensive, but I've run them professionally and personally for over a decade with no problems at all.

This, from Nikon.

EdM's pic is way too high for a good cheekweld, at least for me. My two ar's are using extra high and high. Works good for good cheek position.

Leupold see thru's.

The ocular lens needs to be 2.7" above the bore and forward of the charging handle. They make several mounts that do this and do it right for a lot less than an extended latch that will dig into everything it can find.

This is a LaRue mount but its how a scope should be mounted.

I thought you were going to find a 5.5 pound 18 inch barreled rifle.

Agreed. When I first scoped an AR, I set the scope more towards the butt like I would on a bolt gun. Not only could I not access the charging handle, but cheek weld sucked and I had issues seeing through the optic.

I am ,I figured with the DPMS sportical I would have the bcg,lower Maybe upper and a lightweight barrel and I can be there as it is pretty light to begin with,and if not at the price I got it for I can afford to buy a cav lower or Magnesium lower and get there then sell the DPMS Lower and the Dpms Barrel.
As far as the Colt well ur uh its a Colt !
Craig

Colt 6720 is my fav.

I was at a Local Wally world today and picked up a pair of high Weaver Quad Lock Highs and also a Pair Of Weaver Extra highs and gonna see how they work in a Little bit.I wish they had the Leupold Riflemans but they didn,t

Yes that isa nice rifl but they didn,t have one of those or I probably would have bought one of those as thay are quite a bit lighter than the 6920.

Oh well...

Well I had a 3x9 Leupoldc laying around and tried mounting it using the high weavers and it was a nno go as the Bell of the scope hit the handguard But I then tried the EXTRA HIGH and they worked great.
I then weighed the rifle on Kitchen cooking scales and with the scope and rings and a 30 round metal magazine that came with the Sportical (with 6 rounds in it )total weight of the Package came to 7 pounds 9-1/4 ounces.
I figure since the 3x9 weighed almost 12 ounces once I switch to the 4x I should lose about 3 ounces.Also figure switching to a 5 round magazine ought to save me 3 ounces or more and could always take off the Flash hider(2 ounces?)and would almost be at my 7 pound weight for a scoped rifle ready to go.
albeit with a 16 inch barrel but I think I could get an 18 inch barrel fluted or contoured that wouldn,t weigh any more than the 16 inch barrel and maybe a little less.
I am shooting for (pun Intended) 7 pounds ready to hunt but I MIGHT Just MAYBE settle for 7 pounds and 1 or 2 ounces !
Do the plastic type of magazines weigh more or less than a metal mag of equal Capacity ?
Thanks
Craig
PS the end of the scope bell is right at the end of the charging handle and I can pull the charging handle back easily.
I will get a pic up sometime tommorow.